Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

Send email to this addressEnter Your NameAdd a comment hereVerification

When Alex and Paula Armstrong began volunteering at Long Beach Animal Care Services last April, they thought it would be yet another long stint in their lives’ dedication of loving and helping animals. Paula, originally from Venice, Italy, and Alex, a native of London, England, had spent years giving up their free time to work with animals, and there had always been furry, feathered and shelled friends in the picture, growing up.

“I come from a family of animal lovers, so we always had dogs and cats and birds and turtles around,” Paula said. “When I moved to the States, Alex and I started volunteering– it must have been eight years ago now– at different no-kill rescues.”

They initially sought out such shelters with zero-euthanasia policies because they’d deemed it too emotionally taxing to work with animals that would quite possibly be terminated. However, a change of heart led them to volunteer at a shelter without that no-kill rule– Long Beach Animal Care Services (ACS).

“We decided at the end to try it, just because we realized that those dogs need love too,” she said. “It’s easier on your heart to be in no-kills, but we wanted to try it. And we did– for four months, or whatever it was– since April.”

After a four-month stretch of volunteering at ACS, last week, Paula and Alex were “fired”– not because they didn’t care about the animals they were walking and playing with– but because they cared too much, they say. And because they asked too many questions.

However, their queries were completely reasonable and well founded, the Armstrongs say.

“The first experience is the orientation, in which they pretty much make you believe that they’re getting a lot better, that euthanasia is down to an absolute minimum, and it’s all like this happy family and this happy team,” Paula said. “And we left the orientation thinking, ‘Wow! They changed. That’s great. I feel good about volunteering here.’”
However, after they’d completed the four-week orientation, and actually began working with dogs, their feelings changed.

“I was walking and socializing with one dog, and the next day I’d go to see him– because I’d had some breakthrough [with him and] I was happy that he was reacting– and he would be euthanized,” Paula said. “And this happened to Alex; it happened to me. Other dogs that we knew were healthy, good dogs– even if they weren’t the youngest dog, sometimes they were 2 years old, it made no difference to them. They were just euthanized, and there were plenty of empty cages. So, that’s when you start thinking, ‘What’s your train of thought behind picking this dog and euthanizing them? There’s no need for it. You told me when I started it was only a matter of space, or if a dog was extremely vicious and couldn’t be helped. I never saw a dog [there] that was vicious and couldn’t be helped.”

Alex explained that he’d heard that a few of the facility’s staff members were afraid of some of the larger dogs, which made those animals prime candidates for euthanasia.
He said he’d also gotten wind that some dogs were being put down without even being evaluated.

“We hear that a lot of dogs are being put to sleep before being assessed,” Alex said. “So, it may be a big pit bull, but it may be a baby in its temperament but never given a chance to show that, which is against the law– to put down a dog without assessing it. They will deny that.”

Alex added that he and Paula also found it frustrating that there were dogs that had not been placed on the walk list, despite having been in cages for a month or more.

“So, we would say, ‘Can we walk this dog please?’ ‘No, it hasn’t been assessed yet.’” Alex said. “So, I’d say, ‘Well, when are you planning on doing that?’ And there would be some sort of bad feeling [as in], ‘Why are you asking?’ ‘Because he’s sitting there for a month, and I want to walk him, so he can start socializing and maybe have a chance of life.’ When we started probing with those questions, we could see the irritability in the staff of, ‘Know your role. You’re a volunteer. Stick to what we tell you to do.’ Which then became [from us], ‘No, no. We’re general public, citizens of Long Beach. I also pay my taxes. This facility, your staff– I pay for. I have every right to question you on some of your ethics.’”

But then there were the videos. Alex had shared them on social media to shed light on the issues at ACS, and someone at the facility saw them. That, staff said, was the reason the Armstrongs were let go, the couple said.

“I was devastated,” Alex said. “I was absolutely devastated, because it would take away my ability to help some of these dogs. The shelters that implement the no-kill equation have staff and volunteers aplenty that are like us. It’s compassionate people not taking it as a job, but the volunteers are doing it for free, and staff love to work there. They apply because it’s what they want to do. And that’s why it works– because everybody’s involved in doing anything you possibly can to save a life. When it’s just a job, like any job, people slack, [get] lazy. And when you do that at work, maybe you don’t sell as many products or your shipping doesn’t work or your sales don’t work. But, in this particular instance, when you slack on your job, animals die.”

That alleged lack of workplace enthusiasm could at least partially be attributed to low staffing levels, a finding indicated in both phase 1 and phase 2– the latter having been released late last month– of the City Auditor’s Office most recent audit of ACS.

Six of the 11 second-phase determinations relate to staffing, as follows: the volunteer program is not maximized to assist ACS service delivery; there are not enough animal-care attendants to meet the minimum-care requirements needed to properly feed the animals or clean their housing; there are not enough animal-control officers to meet basic coverage requirements; ACS is below the peer (referring to cities comparable in population and demographics) average for veterinary staff per animal; ACS is below the peer average for staff dedicated to life-saving programs; and ACS staff morale is low, as employees cited overall job dissatisfaction, poor communication and insufficient time and resources.

The other key findings included: ACS is not fully recovering the cost for services that it provides to neighboring contract cities; almost $1 million in citations have not been collected since 2009; the animal-license compliance rate is comparable to those of benchmarked cities, but increasing the number of licensed animals would improve ACS’s cost recovery; vaccination and pet-license data are not entered timely in the [animal sheltering software] Chameleon system; and it is unclear if the license-canvassing program is effective.

On Wednesday, Ted Stevens, manager of ACS, told the Signal Tribune that, despite the audit pointing out its lack of resources and staffing, his employees have made tremendous strides the last few years and that they continue to improve.

“Our staff are very dedicated to the animals,” Stevens said. “The [audit] consultant even pointed out in the Phase 1 report how much all of our staff was dedicated to the well-being of the animals in our care. It is not a question of will or the desire from staff at the shelter. We are proud to be an open-admission shelter that does not turn away any animals. We take in injured, sick, neglected, behavior-challenged and unwanted animals every day. We have saved many animals that a lot of shelters would label as ‘untreatable.’”

He added that ACS has a live-release rate of over 90 percent for the last two years for dogs.

“We still face many challenges, especially with respect to some of our more vulnerable populations, such as pit bulls, dogs with behavior challenges and our underage kittens,” Stevens said. “But, we are working tirelessly to improve in these areas and improve in all other areas, as well. At ACS, we never take lightly euthanizing any animal. We must always consider animal suffering and the safety of the public. Animal safety and public safety are two things we take very seriously here.”

Stevens also said that other cities– such as Austin, Texas– that declare no-kill status have done so by investing a significant amount of resources and money into such an initiative, without requiring additional revenue.

“Our agency was designed [and] budgeted to be an animal-control agency,” Stevens said. “Over the past several years, out of the desire of staff and the community coming together and working together with us, we have moved towards becoming a humane shelter that also focuses on saving lives. This change occurred without additional resources, but rather by reallocating existing resources.”

However, Patricia Turner, director of the group No Kill Long Beach, on Wednesday night, called Stevens’s argument about Austin increasing their budget “specious.”

“Austin is the flagship city for no-kill sheltering. They’ve decided to go no-kill, and they’ve meant it– authentically,” Turner said. “They’ve been willing to invest in their shelter, more than most shelters with high save rates have, and more than LBACS actually needs to. So, Long Beach doesn’t have to dramatically increase its budget to attain no-kill.

But the City uses Austin’s decision to increase their city’s sheltering budget as an excuse to not go no-kill in Long Beach. Austin proves that no-kill can be done, and it can be done exceedingly well. But, not all cities have had to increase their shelter budget, and still they’ve made major progress and are still working to save all healthy and treatable animals.”
But, Stevens seems hopeful about the local shelter’s future.

“The strategic planning process that LBACS will be undertaking later this year and in 2019 is very important,” he said, “to help determine where the resources should be prioritized and what type of agency we truly want to be and can be.”

Stevens himself, however, will likely not be part of that process. He is resigning as the head of ACS to assume another position within the City.
Although he declined to indicate why he is quitting as the shelter’s manager, he did provide some information as to what he will be doing.

“I am looking forward to returning to the Community Recreation Services Bureau with the Long Beach Parks, Recreation & Marine Department,” he said.

Paula Armstrong, who this week acknowledged that she was aware of Stevens’s transfer, didn’t express the same hopefulness that Stevens did, as she lamented the fact that the posting to find his replacement is lacking in one important area.

“The job description for the new manager of the facility says nothing about having some kind of animal knowledge or anything like that,” she said. “You can’t be a normal manager; you’re dealing with lives.”

Despite the Armstrongs’ being let go as volunteers– no longer able to bring some comfort, exercise, love and adoptability to so many dogs– they did manage to walk away from the situation with something positive– Jax, a 2-year-old German shepherd/husky who the couple says was destined for an early death at the shelter. Despite his having been assessed as possessing an undesirable temperament, Jax has officially been adopted into the Armstrong family of husband, wife and three cats.

Photo by Cory Bilicko | Signal Tribune On Tuesday afternoon, (from left) Paula and Alex Armstrong, who reside on the peninsula in Long Beach, walk Jax, a German shepherd-husky whom they recently adopted from Long Beach Animal Care Services, where they had volunteered since April. The married couple say Jax, whom they describe as lovable and friendly to strangers, surely would have been killed had they not fought to adopt him.

The above is the first of a two-part story on Long Beach Animal Care Services.

Firstly, the couple should file a lawsuit for their freedom of speech being violated. Since LBACS is a municipal shelter, anyone can legally take photos/videos and share them on social media without retribution. Secondly, I’d like to see the actual number that show LBACS has had a 90% live release rate of Dogs. Their own stats that they have provided the public and another animal adcoacay group, Long Beach Animal Advocates say it’s much less ham 90%.

Alex Armstrong on
September 11th, 2018 1:37 pm

Thanks Beverly – your message prompted us to find out how to. The No Kill Equation web site speaks about it at length. Apparently we are not the only volunteer’s to be fired for the very same reason. It is happening around the country.

Ole Possum on
September 13th, 2018 5:02 am

Ole Possum- Mr. Armstrong, with your experience, I can’t imagine anyone else who should be better to be offered the job of directing the shelter than you. I think Mr. Stevens should be sent packing! The mayor as well. Busy threatening Arby’s on twitter because they advertise on the Laura Ingraham show while his city suffers from the war coyotes are prosecuting against it, while he takes credit for THEM lowering the euthanasia numbers.

Susan Patterson on
September 7th, 2018 11:40 am

Ted Stevens should never have been manager of ACS. The way the Shelter staff are afraid of big dogs is disgusting. You shouldn’t kill a Pitbull just because you’re afraid. I’m ashamed to say that this is my City…

Steven Childs on
September 7th, 2018 11:44 am

Thank you for bringing this to light.

Angela on
September 7th, 2018 12:13 pm

Thanks for this story. I hope that Long Beach will commit to becoming a no kill shelter during the upcoming strategic planning process. For anyone who would like to be involved and advocate for Long Beach becoming a no kill city, please consider joining groups like Long Beach Animal Advocates, Fix Long Beach, and No Kill Long Beach. You can also volunteer with a local rescue to help at-risk animals find loving homes. I am personally involved with Live Love Animal Rescue (for dogs) and can recommend Little Lion Foundation for kitty lovers.

Ole Possum on
September 7th, 2018 12:35 pm

Hmmm…No mention that Mr. Stevens has said he won’t do anything about the daily ongoing slaughter of pets in Long Beach by coyotes, because “they will only come back”. It seems as if he is letting coyotes reduce the euthanasia numbers for him by reducing the number of pets. But of course, he and the mayor give them no credit, but take it themselves.

mary mote on
September 7th, 2018 4:46 pm

Animal safety and Public safety are two things you take seriously there. Really Stevens? What is safe about letting wild coyotes kill family pets? How safe is that? And why is it when someone wants to report a sighting or death, the phones are busy or the Computers are down, why is that? And putting down dogs that are adoptable for no GOOD reason, doesn’t seem like animal safety to me.. Why is that? Spin it any way you’d like, from the Mayor down, what is happening in our city with Animal Control Service is a joke. The whole thing needs to be addressed and changes made. The very people who pay your salaries, are tired of the “we care” baloney and know a over-haul is over-do. Quit killing animals you shouldn’t and quit letting coyotes kill animals they shouldn’t. How hard can either of those be?

Denise Van Tassel on
September 7th, 2018 9:52 pm

Mr. Pitchford who was the primary donor in th new shelter would not believe that it has come to this

Euthanize easiest on PAID staff. I thought the ASPCA partnered with the Long Beach Pitchford Center to prevent this.

What happened. The Mayor of Long Beach Robert Garcia needs to get involved.

Losing dedicated non paid volunteers should not happen unless there are Real Issues of negligentlant activities.

I should know I spent two years as a volunteer in a no kill shelter having to resign because volunteer workers and no paid staff ran the show

There is a real need to have a commitee review the orphan animal before euthanasia. Real surprise this is routine there.

Kristie Mamelli on
September 9th, 2018 10:21 am

Thank you for keeping the community aware of the lives being lost in our Long Beach Animal Care Services (Care?). The auditor has finished the 2 Phases of the audit, and meanwhile, we are still waiting on an adoption program. The very least a shelter can do for them. We need No Kill programs, The No Kill Equation, at our shelter. The mayor promised an adoption program 4 Years Ago! With his and our council’s self interests in lengthening their terms another 4 years, we cannot sit on our laurels, as they do. We need to get the message out, and we thank you for your investigations and articles!

Vicki Ferguson on
September 9th, 2018 8:49 pm

3 Cheers for the Armstrong’s – Rescues & Facebook groups see a lot of these problems . Volunteers make things work better & do it from their heart. Poor pictures – miss labeling breeds – dogs in back unseen – I don’t even think LBACS has a Facebook . Hopefully change is happening good groups have been battling for change & no kill . Thank you Signal Tribune for writing this .

Maria Demers on
September 9th, 2018 9:19 pm

Garcia is directly responsible for this. He has not fulfilled any election promises he made to the animals or voters. Ted Steven’s is just a pain. Everyone in the shelter should be fired except those on board with a No Kill agenda.
Anything else is unnacceptable.
I bet tons of people would line up if they knew it was No kill. Take all that land adjacent to shelter and make more room so theres no killing for space.

Frankie Banks on
September 12th, 2018 11:57 am

Fire (feet to the coals) all that would put an animal down for no reason.

Comments that include libelous statements are subject to review from editors.